Comparison of Four Bowel Cleansing Agents for Colonoscopy and the Factors Affecting their Efficacy. A Prospective, Randomized Study

Authors

  • Klara Kmochova Department of Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6215-8060
  • Tomas Grega Department of Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
  • Ondrej Ngo Institute of Biostatistics and Analyses, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
  • Gabriela Vojtechova Department of Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
  • Ondrej Majek Institute of Biostatistics and Analyses, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
  • Petr Urbanek Department of Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
  • Miroslav Zavoral Department of Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
  • Stepan Suchanek Department of Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15403/jgld-3401

Keywords:

bowel preparation, cleansing agents, colonoscopy, quality of colonoscopy, screening, polyp detection rate

Abstract

Background and Aims: Adequate bowel preparation is essential for successful and effective colonoscopy. Several types of cleansing agents are currently available including low-volume solutions. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of four different bowel cleansing agents.

Methods: A single-center, prospective, randomized, and single-blind study was performed. Consecutive patients referred for colonoscopy were enrolled and randomized into one of the following types of laxatives: polyethylenglycol 4L (PEG), oral sulfate solution (OSS), 2L polyethylenglycol + ascorbate (2L-PEG/Asc), or magnesium citrate + sodium picosulfate (MCSP). The primary outcome was quality of bowel cleansing evaluated according to the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Secondary outcomes were polyp detection rate (PDR) and tolerability.

Results: Final analysis was performed on 431 patients. The number of patients with adequate bowel preparation (BBPS total scores ≥6 and sub scores ≥2 in each segment) was not significantly different throughout all groups (95.4% PEG; 94.6% OSS; 96.3% 2L-PEG/Asc; 96.2% MCSP; p=0.955). Excellent bowel preparation (BBPS total scores ≥ 8) was associated with younger age (p=0.007). The groups did not have significantly different PDRs (49.5% PEG; 49.1% OSS; 38% 2L-PEG/Asc; 40.4% MCSP; p=0.201). The strongest predictors of pathology identification were age and male gender. The best-tolerated solution was MCSP (palatability: p<0.001; nausea: p=0.024).

Downloads

Published

2021-06-18

How to Cite

1.
Kmochova K, Grega T, Ngo O, Vojtechova G, Majek O, Urbanek P, Zavoral M, Suchanek S. Comparison of Four Bowel Cleansing Agents for Colonoscopy and the Factors Affecting their Efficacy. A Prospective, Randomized Study. JGLD [Internet]. 2021 Jun. 18 [cited 2026 May 25];30(2):213-20. Available from: https://www.jgld.ro/jgld/index.php/jgld/article/view/3401

Issue

Section

Original Article